Feedburner
Chirac Wrong On Iran Nukes
Jaques Chirac proved this week that he does not understand the powers running Iran. From NYTimes (probably need to register):
"I would say that what is dangerous about this situation is not the fact of having a nuclear bomb," he said. "Having one or perhaps a second bomb a little later, well, that's not very dangerous."But what is very dangerous is proliferation. This means that if Iran continues in the direction it has taken and totally masters nuclear-generated electricity, the danger does not lie in the bomb it will have, and which will be of no use to it."
Mr. Chirac said it would be an act of self-destruction for Iran to use a nuclear weapon against another country.
"Where will it drop it, this bomb? On Israel?" Mr. Chirac asked. "It would not have gone 200 meters into the atmosphere before Tehran would be razed."
To think that Iran having a few nuclear weapons as being "not very dangerous" is foolish, when one takes into account the rhetoric that regularly comes from that country. It is clear that should Iran reach the point that they can refine uranium sufficiently to build a bomb, the greater threat is that they will sell some of this material to terrorist organizations that will then use it in a suicide nuke. That potential threat is the point with preventing Iran's continued development of nuclear technology.
It is also idiotic to think that, should Iran launch against Israel, Theran would be razed within a few minutes of such a launch. Most likely Theran would be destroyed by a retaliatory strike shortly after Iran's missiles hit their targets. Regardless of the timing, it ignores the fact that the rulers of Iran would not be phased by a potential retaliatory strike. They would take shelter, let the population get fried, then revel in the destruction.
That assumes they don't use Hezbollah to do the dirty work, which, as pointed out above, is the more likely scenario. Smuggle the uranium in, build the bomb in country, and detonate it. Then Tehran could say "Gee, how'd that happen?"
Tags: